Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23955024›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2013

"You need something like this to give you guidelines on what to do": patients' and partners' use and perceptions of a self-directed coping skills training resource.

Sylvie D Lambert, Afaf Girgis, Jane Turner, Tim Regan, Hayley Candler, Ben Britton, Suzanne Chambers, Catalina Lawsin, Karen Kayser

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A stepped-care approach to self-management: a qualitative study among individuals with cancer and their caregivers using the Coping-Together program.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sylvie D LambertIngram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Wilson Hall, 3506 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2A7, Canada, sylvie.lambert@mcgill.ca.
Afaf Girgis
Jane Turner
Tim Regan
Hayley Candler
Ben Britton
Suzanne Chambers
Catalina Lawsin
Karen Kayser

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aims to report on the acceptability of a self-directed coping skills intervention, called Coping-Together, for patients affected by cancer and their partners, including the strengths and limitations of the intervention design.

methodsThis initial version of Coping-Together included a series of four booklets, which aimed to provide practical coping strategies for the day-to-day management of common physical and psychosocial challenges. Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 patients and/or 14 partners. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for content.

resultsParticipants endorsed the self-directed format, and the focus of Coping-Together on practical information was a feature that set it apart from other resources. The majority of participants interviewed felt that the proposed coping strategies were "doable"; however, only half of the participants reported learning new coping skills after reading the booklets. Additional benefits of reading the booklets were increasing awareness of challenges to prepare for, giving hope that something can help you "pull through", providing a sense of normality, connecting patients and partners to people and services, and complementing support received from health professionals. Despite the general acceptability of the intervention, some aspects of its design were criticized, including the workbook-like exercises, expectations about using the resource together, level of guidance provided, and amount of information included. In general, most participants felt that too much negative information was included, whereas more experiential information was desired.

conclusionsPreliminary evaluation of Coping-Together supported its practical approach and highlighted improvements to enhance its contribution to patient and partner coping.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalPatient SatisfactionFemaleGuidelines as TopicHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient Education as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.